Skip to main content

About your Search

Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)
. before congress passed a medicare part b prescription drug benefit in 2003 traditional medicare did not provide coverage for prescription drugs. many seniors tasted difficult choice between medicine and meals. when congress passed part d the republican majority at the time left a gap in coverage known as the doughnut hole. when a senior on medicare spends $2,600 on prescription medication they fall into the doughnut hole coverage that and have to pay for their drugs 100% out of pocket until they reach $5,600 in prescription drug spending glistens seniors never reached the top of mt. the calendar year so they pay 100% for the rest of the year until the next year. many seniors living on fixed income can't afford to pay their way through the gap in coverage. the affordable care act phases out the doughnut hole closing it for good in 2020 saving seniors $300 a year in drug costs. a year after president obama sine die affordable care act into law i spoke at the democratic club, one of the largest democratic club in florida whose membership is largely made of senior citizens who live in m
't want the government fooling with my medicare. do they know johnson put that federal program? you remember some of the rhetoric. roosevelt said nothing to fear but fear itself and kennedy said ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country. reagan said it's mourning in america and the pride is that. we remember these inspirational talks. for the moment kennedy and reagan are the ones who fill that bill. it will be interesting to see what evolves over the next 50 years. i am very selfish. i say i wish it would could come back in a couple hundred years and see what has happened in the country but my grandiosity does not extend that far. [laughter] >> ladies and gentlemen please join me in thanking robert dallek. [applause] >> thank you.
detached in that sense, too. we're going to have medicare and have demonstration programs, but i think it would have been acutely aware, for instance 0, the political dangers of a great society program with big city mayors at odds with community based organizations, fighting for money. kennedys were from boston. they understood the black-white conflict in terms of white working class and schools. johnson saw it as the north and the south. so i think you would -- kennedy just didn't talk that way. i can't imagine him calling for a war on poverty. because he had a great degree of skepticism about the power of government, whether it was military or domestic. he would have had programs, but smaller, more modest, and it would have been very important for kennedy to make sure that this wasn't seen as a racial program. shortly before he left for dallas, the one political meeting he had, he was talking about poverty, and the record of the census bureau, said this is all real. i wouldn't do that, mr. president. you got all the poor votes. you need suburban votes, salt lake hands with cops. kenn
a handle on the safety net programs like social security and medicare. that is the appropriate role for the government and i think most americans agree. which is why they reelected president obama. >> do you think richard's concern? he feels it is being put on him. is that a fair concern? >> i really don't. in this case, accusations like he unfortunately chose to do isn't constructive. i wish folks like him would step back, listen and engage in dialogue and understand the other side's point of view. when you here talk like his, it is evident he is watching fox news and gets the information mostly from right-wing conservative sources and isn't open to other points of view. and that is why i wrote the book. hopefully someone finds a way to see we have to try to work together and not dig in so hard and accept everything we hear from one side or another. >> putting on your political hat for a moment. the rollout of the health care website: has it hurt democrats polytically? >> that is not a political issue. it is critical. and obama believes that we have to get the website on so people
, and i think bankrupt. then we got medicare, bankrupt. now we're going to quadruple down on obamacare. what? what could she have been thinking? what she's thinking is this is the corner stone of the socialist future, which is what she believes in, that, you know, everything else fails because we didn't get enough money. we couldn't extract enough money because of these evil republicans who are antitaxation it's an imaginary future, and that makes it dangerous. these people with pumped up, their own intoxication by their own self-righteousness in bringing together the wonderful world in which all you, republicans, conservatives are determined it prevent from happening, and that is the only obstacle to them. we, human beings, are the root cause of all social problems and all government problems as well. if human beings were not so screwed up in their way, yeah -- it's not hard to lie, is it? everybody does it. we do the fib, it smooths things over. we then have power at stake, and, you know, wonderful goods at stake, lies grow and grow and grow until there's a president 36 times who tol
actually talk about this. there's a safety net chapter for the next generation that i talk about medicare and social security and medicaid and some of the things we could do, one of which is if you take off that cap, the income cap, in a 75 years of solvency to social security. 75 years. now, will wealthier people, obviously you make of the $107,000 care that now they are paying taxes on all their income? sure. but the whole point of last year's election, remember we debated this for the whole presidential election in 2012, whether everybody should have a fair shot and a fair shake and everybody should pay their fair share. why should wealthier people pay a smaller percentage of their income in taxes into the safety net programs that are so essential so we have the minimum floor through which we are not going to flout our frail seniors to slip through. the answer is they should ever have to focus on working towards that goal. thank you. >> i congresswoman, nice to see you again. >> you, too. >> my question is about the gridlock. yesterday, george goodman, we have a discussion about woodro
. a lot more than medicare a students they were asking about their career path. the worse question you can ask at google is the career path. it was good advice. you were saying we want you to be flexible. >> the way i would describe is it when people call me up and say i'm a vp now and i need to be senior vice president or chief operating officer in your company and i would say, click. it's not how we operate. we want you to join our cause. what you believe and what we're doing. and you will do just fine nap advice worked well for the people who managed to not screw up. .. as much as the opportunity to impact. >> another question. you shifted to a new company to get a better role. does it take to get that new opportunity? >> the data says that for women it often does, but not always. for our negotiating we've talked about. as we educate yourself on the biases, we can change that. i don't think it takes moving on. sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't. i think it takes solving problems. the right way to approach her career is to say what problem can i solve? one of my favorite hiring stor
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)